Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24504496›Full record

ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2014

[Expert evidence in whiplash injury: interdisciplinary orthopaedic and biomechanical approach].

M N Magin, C Auer

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M N MaginSpezialpraxis für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Bahnhofsweg 10, 82008, Unterhaching/München, Deutschland, info@drmagin.de.
C Auer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considering the controversially discussed issue of whiplash injury a pragmatic approach based on our own experience in the area of forensic expert opinion is presented. Findings of accident analysis and biomechanics are correlated with the individual situation after the accident (initial clinical appearance), the course of the ailment and the indispensable physical examination. The latter leads to determination of the individual vulnerability (not increased/increased) which is important for the evaluation of the physical condition and estimation of the physical stress limit. These limits vary widely between individuals and must be considered carefully when relating dose and effect of accident severity to a possible physical injury. Determination of the accident severity is especially important when there are no objective signs of injury and the existence of a minor whiplash injury (Quebec Task Force degree 1 or 2) is in question.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalSeverity of Illness IndexExpert TestimonyGermanyHumansMalpracticeOrthopedicsWhiplash Injuries

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.